City of Redmond staff told council that transportation impacts are evaluated early in the annexation process and that several funding and jurisdictional tools exist to manage traffic effects as land moves from county to city control.

Lindsay Crump, Public Works and Engineering, said the city requires a transportation impact analysis before master plan submittal or council action and that the analysis covers trip generation, level of service at impacted intersections, access management and crash history. "We look at crash summaries and patterns reported through the state's databases," Crump said, adding that a safety problem is defined when an intersection meets the code's specified crash threshold.

The presentation tied those reviews to the city's planning documents: the 2040 comprehensive plan, the Transportation System Plan (TSP) and other public-facility master plans. Kyle (last name not specified), planning staff, explained the sequence: pre‑development meetings, drafting annexation agreements, council review of annexation agreements, then master development plan submission and a required transportation impact analysis before formal land‑use hearings.

Why it matters: when county roads or properties inside the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) are annexed, ownership and standards can change. Crump and city staff stressed that funding for required intersection or frontage improvements can come from different sources depending on project status: System Development Charges (SDCs) tied to identified projects, city capital improvement projects, developer proportionate‑share contributions, or direct developer construction for improvements not already in the TSP.

County coordination and jurisdictional transfers were highlighted as operational levers. Crump noted a recorded joint management agreement from February 2007 that assigns responsibilities between city and county for lands in the UGB/URA and suggested that it is time to revisit and update that document. County representatives in the meeting were present to discuss opportunities for joint planning, transfer of county roads inside the UGB and potential maintenance dollars associated with jurisdictional changes.

Councilors raised zoning and timing concerns. Councilor Sakai asked whether annexation and master plan steps should be combined so the council sees zoning and land‑use details earlier; the council exchange reflected frustration that large acreages can annex with predesignated future city zones (R‑4, R‑5) that may lock in dense residential zoning without concurrent opportunities for commercial or mixed‑use uses. Kyle clarified that when a development proposes a different zone or higher density than the comp plan assumption, applicants must submit a transportation compliance memorandum subject to state review.

On a neighborhood example, staff described work on Pershall and Tenth Street: the city is requiring frontage improvements and a reorientation of an angled intersection to a safer 90‑degree alignment and adding left‑turn lanes as part of developer conditions once properties annex. Crump noted the city conditions are applied to bring the roadway segments up to City of Redmond standards once they come under city jurisdiction.

The council and staff also discussed practical constraints: the county currently owns and maintains some roads inside the UGB and uses county maintenance funds; when roads transfer to the city, they must typically be brought up to city standards either by developers or through capital projects. Council members and county staff discussed funding challenges, with county representatives emphasizing that major projects (for example, multimillion‑dollar intersection builds) require financing beyond small maintenance savings and that a combination of SDCs, proportionate‑share payments and capital funds is typically needed.

Ending: Staff said they will continue the conversation with the county about updating the joint management agreement, improving predictability in the annexation/master plan process and integrating transportation considerations earlier in review steps. Council asked staff to return with options for how annexation and master plan timing could be aligned and suggested continued focus on school route safety, sidewalks and pedestrian connections in areas anticipated for growth.